ianr

Another recourse might be to apply to the DVLA for details of the car's registered keeper: http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/data/relinfo/howtorequest.aspx. If obtained, you could then pursue damages personally. I don't know what your duty of disclosure to your insurers might be in any circumstance.

> As a share owner I hope we follow the lead of the communty run pub in Cowden Pound in Kent. One ale. Nothing else on draft. There is presumably scope for getting advice and information from other community pubs, such as those here: http://www.plunkett.co.uk/whatwedo/currentcooperativepubs.cfm. It looks as if the Ivy may be the first co-operative city pub; if so, perhaps a really ground-breaking experiment. I see there's a forum on the sub-site too. I'm not sure to what extent registration there is intended for Plunkett member managers or shareholders, any co-op managers/shareholders, or anyone interested. Having looked at the Ivy share prospectus, I don't know what Plunkett Foundation Rules are and haven't seen any: perhaps contained in one of the advice or guidance documents on their website? Nor can I find the Ivy's own online society rules, that the prospectus also refers to. I'm not a subscriber, btw, just an interested observer. I dare say this is all WIP.

There are two licences for the Bishop on the on-line register at present, 836635 of January 19 2012 and 840980 of May 08 2013. They're at http://app.southwark.gov.uk/licensing/LicPremisesGrantedResults.asp?TypeDesc=Premises%20Licence&RegisterType=LPG&TradingName=Bishop&batch=5&submit=Continue. They each contain these conditions: 288 - That the CCTV system installed upon the premises shall be maintained in good working condition and operable at all times 299 - Tha Two(2)SIA Door Supervisors shall be sited at the entrance to the premises on Fridays and Saturdays to control the entry and leaving the premises. 342 - That an appropriate level of lighting shall be installed to assist in the Prevention of Crime & Disorder. The lighting units are to be installed to the internal and external parts of the premises. 343 - That all staff are to be trained in Risk Management, applicable to the Prevention of Crime & Disorder. 345 - That the lighting and security shall be maintained in good working order at all times > and no, I never heard from the Bishop, despite asking quite a few times for feedback/ whether the CCTV images could be used etc. Examining those is the police's responsibility, isn't it? Though I suppose any pub manager has a general responsibility to his customers to help stop known-of sneak thieves from being on his premises. Oddly, neither of them contains this condition, which I found in the first licence I looked at for comparion, that granted to the Plough on November 27 2012. 289 - That recordings taken by the CCTV system installed upon the premises shall be kept and made available for inspection by authorised officers for a period of thirty one (31) days ; though I hope and presume that they are similarly retained and available at the Bishop.

The URL of the live departures page for ED station has recently changed, btw. It's now www.southernrailway.com/your-journey/plan-your-journey/live-running-information/EDW/departures/.

If you really do want to submit it through an immigration law practitioner, LadyDeliah is an officially registered one, and local. If you're in a hurry, I believe the advice about making an application in person is probably still relevant. I'd hope that's the case, given that you'd be paying a ?375 premium, but I've no idea what current practice is, or what any gain would be. Regardless, I note from paras. 3.3 and 3.2.4 of the Partners casework guidance available at http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/IDIs/chp8-annex/ that "The applicant must also not have overstayed by more than 28 days at the date of application." So I really would, to best avoid further delay and complication, try to submit something that's legally recognised as a formal application before you have totted up 28 days of overstay. I don't read anything you've said above as constituting "exceptional circumstances" of the type they specify in 3.2.4a. Actually, I rescind that last paragrph. It may well be the case that the Family members transitional arrangements section, http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/IDIs/idischapter8/ applies. I've not checked what they may say about the effects of overstay.

I think it's E.Tyer. (As a reality check: zero Fyer marriage records found in FreeBMD for 1920-1940.) The first E Tyer marriages found after 1918 are: Mar 1924 Tyer Amy E = Goodwin Bethnal G. Mar 1938 Tyer Louise E = Dickenson Gateshead Jun 1938 Tyer Eugenia E = Edwards Deptford Sep 1946 Tyer Eugenia = Lytton Dover To do any serious tracking you'll want her forename.

> Hmm..and I've just come home to find a drum abandoned by the bin outside my home. Disposable drums for giving to guests at parties and celebrations? What a spiffing idea. > the distraction of dozens of joggers' arses pertly emoting all the way up the side of the Rye. Your pathetic fallacy is showing.

maxash, just to mention a Radio 4 programme on BPD this week: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01sm6s0. I've not heard it myself yet, but it looks interesting.

"Consultation period starts: 01/05/2013 Consultation period ends: 24/05/2013" http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9549236 (though I think late comments may still be looked at). Their Design and Access document states that they are not aware of any existing noise transmission problem, with their current single glazing. They add: "The new work will be both double glazed and have roof and wall insualtion. The worship and youth areas will be contained within two walls from ther nearest residential buildings." > Has anybody been to any of the meetings at the current building or spoken to anyone from there? There is an eye-opening photograph at http://www.eastdulwichtabernacle.org

> Well said Louisa. In our increasingly crowded spaces, people should be a little less self absorbed and show a little more courtesy to others. A Harpo horn usually does the trick.

From The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces (Amendment) etc.Regulations 2010 amendments to the Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997: "Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road 1. On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St James?s Park or The Regent?s Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph. 2. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not exceeding 20 mph. 3. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15 mph. 4. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not exceeding 10 mph." http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2010/pdf/uksi_20101194_en.pdf

I was simply saving the trouble of anyone who, finding it in the General ED Issues section, thought it might have something to do with a day in Dulwich rather than being an online imitation of Living South. I do actually recommend reading it though, for its toe curling gruesomeness, even if I do myself regularly post A J Farmers' artisan rat traps to a maiden aunt in the Orkneys. I'm disappointed, though, to see nothing about the backstreet cupcake sweatshops.

[Duplicate deleted.] [Above post edited: R7Changes.txt now viewable]

I've cobbled together (attached) what I believe the relevant regulation 7 looks like both before and after the change. Please let me know of any mistake. Afaics, there is currently a provision that absence for holiday may be granted in "special circumstances", and that, unless there are "exceptional circumstances", such absence should not exceed ten days a year. The change apparently removes any reference to holidays or to any limit, and specfies that absence can be granted only in exceptional circumstances. It looks to me as if any skirmishing or litigation about this will have to deal with problems such as mismatch between holidays as mentioned by Renata, and whether they constitute an "exceptional circumstance". Presumably there may already be some kind of conventional understanding, or maybe even legal precedent, as to what "exceptional circumstances" might be in this context. What is a "special school" as in para.5?

"Completely London Blog" "People, places and property in London" "Brought to you by Kinleigh Folkard and Hayward" "Owner of East Dulwich lifestyle emporium Roullier White, Lawrence White takes us on a shopping spree in SE22." etc, etc Result of WHOIS query: Domain name: completelylondon.co.uk Registrant: Kinleigh Limited

> Please respond with any thoughts ? Lounge.

Clapton

> dobbie ? That's Isy Suttie.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can't remember any near misses with motorbikes actually, but have had hundreds from badly driven > cars, vans, buses and lorries and have been hit about a dozen times. > > Pedestrians walking out into the road are pretty scary if there is a lot of traffic, because I > could get knocked under a vehicle. If there are no cars then we are both likely to get hurt. My > reactions are pretty good though and I cycle ultra defensively, so I can usually judge when someone > is about to wander into the road without looking. Getting hit a dozen times is a very large number, even for someone doing decades of commuting in London, and particularly if riding defensively. What were the circumstances of the the last two or three instances?

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This guy got community service for his second conviction of causing a cyclist's death by dangerous driving: > http://road.cc/content/news/83478-ctc-and-families-cyclists-killed-same-driver-25-years-apart-call-appeal-against Accoring to that article: The conviction was for causing death by careless driving. He was also banned from driving for five years. The 1986 conviction was for causing death by reckless driving. The Sentencing Guidelines Council's Definitive Guideline "Causing Death By Driving" is here: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/web_causing_death_by_driving_definitive_guideline.pdf [PDF, 360 kB]

From Appendix C of the associated papers linked to by James: "The above application is not for a 24 hours alcohol licence. It is for the sale of alcohol to start from 6am instead of 7am in the morning and finish at the current time which is 23.00. It also has a request to to include late night refreshment till 05.00. The premises intends to be open 24hours and technically licensing does not have jurisdiction on these, however comments can be made on the licensable activities stated above. kind regards Dorcas Mills Principal Licensing Officer

I'd first test my own scales, on a hard surface (even a carpet can reportedly alter some readings by up to 2.5kg) , either using objects of a known weight and using a total weight in the range of interest, or by comparing with previously calibrated and tested scales. And keep a record. Even domestic scales with a systematic error can be useful, so long as it's consistent and you know what it is. If their inherent error (most measuring devices have one) was substantially lower than the 2kg discrepancy you noted, I'd think of having a word with the airline and/or Gatwick's local Trading Standards office. It's not unknown for airport scale readings to be in error. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1583588/Gatwick-bag-weighing-scales-one-in-five-faulty.html

Household bleach solution seems to be an effective way of zapping the virus on surfaces. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norovirus#Prevention

Also included in the press release from Jenny Jones: http://www.london.gov.uk/media/assembly-member-press-releases/green-party/2013/05/news-from-jenny-jones-am-jenny-jones-am-to-host-cyclists-and-the "A limited number of spaces are available for the event. If you would like to attend, please email [email protected] with your personal details by Monday 20th May. Places will be allocated on a first come, first served basis. Refreshments will be provided."

> The island was placed there because people cross the road there Anyone know when it was put there?